Re: HARDAKER TRANSFER LISTED : Wed Jun 08, 2016 9:59 am  

Marty Grrrrrrrrrr! wrote:

You make some good points but you keep mentioning Zak's decision. This decision was as much Leeds' decision as Zak's.

By making the transfer public without a deal in place already Leeds could find themselves in a bit of an awkward situation if nothing goes thru.

Canberra said they wasnt interested yesterday, whether true or not, Penrith have been mentioned but they are releasing people to fit under cap so that doesnt add up. Titans? Knights? Who knows. Where else is there to go?

Now its out in the open and as Leeds have said "its in interests of both parties" they are now faced with a dilema if nothing happens.

There is no doubt he is best full back at the club and has never stopped trying no matter how bad his form has or hasnt been.

Leeds should have said nothing and got the deal done if possible without making it public knowledge because if nothing happens with NRL or anybody the whole world knows we dont want him and he doesnt want to be with us.

Until something happens if the coaches decide he will be ok mentally he should be our full back in my opinion.

It's Zak's decision:

Zak:

“I explained my desire to leave and test myself in the NRL to Gary several weeks ago and I am pleased the club is prepared to release me."

If he doesn't want to be here, I'm glad Leeds are selling him.

Re: HARDAKER TRANSFER LISTED : Wed Jun 08, 2016 10:22 am  

thebloodbath wrote:

It's Zak's decision:

Zak:

“I explained my desire to leave and test myself in the NRL to Gary several weeks ago and I am pleased the club is prepared to release me."

If he doesn't want to be here, I'm glad Leeds are selling him.

Partly Zak's decision but just as much Leeds' decision. Dont believe all youn read

Re: HARDAKER TRANSFER LISTED : Wed Jun 08, 2016 10:31 am  

Marty Grrrrrrrrrr! wrote:

Partly Zak's decision but just as much Leeds' decision. Dont believe all youn read

So I'm not to believe Zak's statement?

If he doesn't want to be here (which is what he is saying), get shot. if you keep someone who doesn't want to be here you end up with Greg Eastwood on your hands. Don't make that mistake twice.

Re: HARDAKER TRANSFER LISTED : Wed Jun 08, 2016 10:42 am  

I agree we need to get rid that is why GH said its in best interests of both parties but the fact remains there arent many NRL we could get rid to. If he doesnt go and Leeds dont get their wish weve a full back with 4 years left on his deal so saying send him to a lower league team isnt feasible.

Re: HARDAKER TRANSFER LISTED : Wed Jun 08, 2016 10:48 am  

Marty Grrrrrrrrrr! wrote:

I agree we need to get rid that is why GH said its in best interests of both parties but the fact remains there arent many NRL we could get rid to. If he doesnt go and Leeds dont get their wish weve a full back with 4 years left on his deal so saying send him to a lower league team isnt feasible.

Not for the long term.

But i'd put him out somewhere, keep him busy, keep his drama away from the rest of team, until something is sorted.

Re: HARDAKER TRANSFER LISTED : Wed Jun 08, 2016 10:54 am  

thebloodbath wrote:

Not for the long term.

But i'd put him out somewhere, keep him busy, keep his drama away from the rest of team, until something is sorted.

Which is the reason Leeds shouldnt have made it public in my opinion and just got the deal done before announcing it. If he goes nowhere, which i believe is unlikely but possible it will linger on and could cause issues.

We both agree he needs to go just for different reasons.

Re: HARDAKER TRANSFER LISTED : Wed Jun 08, 2016 11:05 am  

Marty Grrrrrrrrrr! wrote:

Which is the reason Leeds shouldnt have made it public in my opinion and just got the deal done before announcing it. If he goes nowhere, which i believe is unlikely but possible it will linger on and could cause issues.

We both agree he needs to go just for different reasons.

You seen state of Zak on Twitter? Leeds probably thought 'announce what we know, before numpty starts typing again' !!

Re: HARDAKER TRANSFER LISTED : Wed Jun 08, 2016 11:08 am  

Marty Grrrrrrrrrr! wrote:

Partly Zak's decision but just as much Leeds' decision. Dont believe all youn read

You are Incorrect there, so do believe what you read. Leeds have tried various other ways before announcing on Saturday, and have now come up with a solution they are happy with. You only have to look at the statement and the comments by Hetherington and McDermott to see what their preferred option was.

It was orgiginally end of season asked for. It is only the offers since that have changed it to as soon as. He already has the club lined up, and agreed with Leeds, but if they don't pay the fee then it will be sorted end of season.

Longer he stays for me, more chance of him changing his mind.

Re: HARDAKER TRANSFER LISTED : Wed Jun 08, 2016 11:40 am  

Anyone dropped a quick email informing the Australian equivalent of the NUS yet?

Re: HARDAKER TRANSFER LISTED : Wed Jun 08, 2016 12:00 pm  

thebloodbath wrote:

So I'm not to believe Zak's statement?

If he doesn't want to be here (which is what he is saying), get shot. if you keep someone who doesn't want to be here you end up with Greg Eastwood on your hands. Don't make that mistake twice.

Greg Eastwood was pretty much our best player in the last few matches of that season.